Parents in the North need to be more pushy like their Southern counterparts.

[Sixisthemagicnumber]

According to the BBC breakfast news a new study has found that parents in the North are not pushy enough with their children's education and they need to be more like Southern parents.
Apparently children in the North are doing less well in Secondary school and this is due to their parents not pushing them hard enough.
They haven't even bothered to take into consideration the vast funding differences between schools in the North and the South

Bollocks, I'm in Yorkshire and I'm incredibly pushy!!!
(Actually I'm not really that bad)

Sixthsenseless- schools in London do better because they've had money injected into them for the past 15 years, because they were so poor before that, and people were worried that high-flyers were leaving London due to seeking decent education for their children.
London education problem mostly solved now, unfortunately at the expense of the rest of the country.

I think if more people chose their local comp rather them shipping their kids out of the area ...the local comp might be in better shape.

Which is fine in theory, but who will be willing to risk their own childrens' education to do that when there are better schools within range? It would only work if everyone went to their nearest school and there was no choice at all. That just won't happen these days as choice has become the mantra of all colours of government.

As for cost of transport etc., there's a growing comp just across our county border which actually provides free school buses to those who can't afford it which is leaving a vacuum in our town which has two failing schools. Quite a sight to see the convoy of at least 10 buses, some of which go past one of the schools and pick up kids from right outside it! The thing is that it's in a sleepy village which can barely support it's own primary school, yet there's this huge 1000+ comp which is sucking in kids from three large surrounding towns. Our two town schools really don't stand a chance and are going further downhill with ever decreasing rolls etc.

London education problem mostly solved now, unfortunately at the expense of the rest of the country.

Yea, I totally agree and mentioned the funding difference in one of my early posts. There are a few exceptions to the rule, for example, Trafford schools are well above the national average but then Trafford house prices are also way above the Northern average and many of the children are tutored / prepped to within an inch of their lives to ensure a place at the grammars unless they are rich enough to live in catchment of Wellington school.

"London education problem mostly solved now, unfortunately at the expense of the rest of the country."

I don't believe that the achievement of London children has stopped non London children from achieving. How does a child in Brent working their socks off affect the achievement of a lazy child in Luton. London schools used to be dire, but the London Challenge helped schools.

We need to be more pro active about improving non London schools. The planned national teaching service which would have parachuted exceptional teachers into under performing schools has been scrapped.

I am sad that Michael Wilshaw is leaving OFSTED. What he says makes a lot of sense.

I heard this on R4 this morning and it was all about funding and unemployment poverty etc, absolutely nothing to do with being pushy?

A hold in Luton who is bright and hardworking will still be negatively affected by not having the same level of funding and resources given to his education as a child in inner London. Money does make a difference.

This article is interesting.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11473308/School-funding-is-a-postcode-lottery-head-teachers-warn.html

Certainly London schools are well funded, but they have to pay a London weighting to attract staff. Areas outside London are expensive yet schools in these area don't get extra cash.

I am not sure how much of a relationship there is between money and quality of education. I don't understand why schools in notthingham should get more funding.

The planned national teaching service which would have parachuted exceptional teachers into under performing schools has been scrapped.

It was scrapped because no one wanted to do it. Offering £10k to outstanding teachers in order for them to uproot and move to Blackpool or similar didn't have any takers. £10k. I mean, FFS.

I am not sure how much of a relationship there is between money and quality of education.

Really? Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then? The children attending them are no more able than other children, in general.
I think money has a lot to do with education.

Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then?

Perhaps the kids that attend have a greater work ethic? If their parents are so bothered that they pay for a private education, they're probably "pushy" parents who are on top of their kids' education and make sure that they do the work etc.

Even a mediocre teacher will have better results if their pupils turn up to class motivated, engaged and willing to do the work.

PhilODox Really? Why do you think fee-paying schools do so well then?

Do all fee-paying schools do well? How many of them include resits in their results? How many of them actually place their results in the public domain in a way that they can be easily compared to state schools?

Most fee paying schools select on ability to some extent so as well as motivated engaged parents they have a more academic than average intake. But not all private schools are very good and those which are less selective usually receive lesser results.
Whilst London schools do indeed need a weighting allowance calculated into the amount they receive for each pupil the amount that they receive exceeds what is required to cover the additional costs of running a school in London. The factors that London schools receive enough money to not only cover the additional costs of being in London but also enough to provide additional resources for pupils which other schools around the country cannot afford.

"I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard".

I think there is a lot of truth in this.

Not that natural ability has 'nothing' to do with academic success, but that it's over emphasised to a very high degree.

Private schools often do well because of their ablity to select students and kick out under performing students. You can't compare private schools with state schools. There are so many factors other than money per head. Private school parents are supportive of education and that makes a bigger difference than anything.

Lots of countries who do better than us spend less on education. How well children do is down to how hard children work. It's not down to having fancy ICT or interesting school outings. Having a well trained work force who are happy and moviated makes a great difference. British teachers (including England, Scotland, Wales and May Northern Ireland) often leave the profession within five years.

London is an odd case. It's schools need more money as having a school in London is very expensive.

I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard

I believe the same to be true, but only to GCSE level where the work isn't actually that difficult nor intellectually challenging - it is more a matter of hard graft, rote learning etc to get the top grades.

I think it's different for A levels and beyond. I know loads of kids from family, neighbours and colleagues who did OK at GCSE but basically couldn't cope with A levels, in fact the number I know who were unceremoniously dumped out at the end of year 12 is quite shocking, who then had to take a step back and go to College instead.

Yes running a school in London is expensive tired but the additional London costs don't account for all the additional money given to London schools. It will be interesting to see what happens under the new funding formula.

mumtrying- resits are not included in performance tables. Fee-paying schools in my authority are included in performance tables.
Reallytired Private school parents are supportive of education - how many do you actually know? Many I know say education is school's business, that's what they pay for, and are completely hands off and non-supportive.

"I think there is a growing mindset that natural academic ability has nothing to do with academic success, it's all about effort and working hard".
That's bollocks isn't it? To achieve full potential you need to work hard and have good teaching (or the means and ability to teach yourself) but what that potential is for different subjects varies enormously between individuals when it comes to academic success. Which isn't the same thing as having a successful life.

I'd agree that success in life will be correlated with effort and

...maybe I'd be more successful if I could type a bloody post properly....

PhilODox Tue 06-Dec-16 16:00:00 mumtrying- resits are not included in performance tables. Fee-paying schools in my authority are included in performance tables.

Well if this table really does contain the top 300 performing private school, I would say that fee paying schools are not doing too well:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/09/02/gcse-results-2016-independent-schools-table/

I haven't rtft but I live in the North and am somewhat frustrated by the absolute assumption that pushy parents and pressure on children is a good and desirable thing.
Aspiration is good, helicoptering and frantic pressured schedules are not

Badbadbunny I believe the same to be true, but only to GCSE level where the work isn't actually that difficult nor intellectually challenging - it is more a matter of hard graft, rote learning etc to get the top grades.

Really, so you think every child is capable of achieving A* or Level 9 at GCSE, it's just a case of working hard?

There may well be a North/South divide but it isn't so black and white as that. Preps and Grammar schools a plenty in my bit of the North and there are very many pushy parents up here

I don't really care what they mean by 'be more pushy' - the report is just another way to say 'I blame the parents' really isn't it?

Maybe they mean 'be more middle class'. Maybe they mean 'don't send your kid to school with a bad attitude to learning or an empty stomach'. Unpleasant either way. And so Tory - consumers must shop around to get a reasonable energy supplier; parents must push if they want schools to be good. Either way, it's not our fault, or our problem.